Vanity Fair
Sep. 4th, 2004 12:27 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
rmI've not read the book in a long time, but I will say those who have read it more recently and love it for what it is wil probably be annoyed by a variety of things in this film.
That said, it is an astounding, gorgeous, and very flawed piece of cinema, that you expect to assault you but instead just sort of creeps away at you. I found I liked it well enough during, and only felt overwhelmed when it was over -- not for the ending or anything else really, but the sum total of what we endure with the characters is remarkable.
Reese Witherspoon is good in the role, but as has oft been mentioned she feels too modern. It's hard to entirely put a finger on why, although it's something akin to why Keira Knightly is at times one of the more absurd distractions in King Arthur -- a very posh, modern voice. Also this Becky has been gentled enough that when she's bad you actually stop to be dissappointed in her, which is a bit odd.
Jonathan Rhys Myers is, as ever, an unpleasant predatory self-absorbed cat-like thing. It's so predictable a bit of casting for him though, it's almost annoying, until he has one moment of such callousness that the wind gets knocked out of you.
The actor who walks away with the film though is James Purefoy. Where the rest of the cast seems to be striving gamely to keep up with the costumes and the scenery and to act through the stiffled manner of the time-period, he's just so physically alive on screen -- and I've seen him in other period pieces, and that was never there before. Really... not work that looks difficult, but the result is so astounding, it clearly is. Wonderful wonderful wonderful. (also, the one love scene is so honest and joyful it took me aback. Lovely stuff). Side note... he's a good rider, but every time he was on the damn horse I was like "get your toes in!" -- see what this shit is doing to me?
Gabriel Byrne is also an amazing menacing presence in this film and is one of the many constant specters of death over the thing. There's a visual device involving Becky's travelling trunk that makes it clear from our first view of it, that she's dragging about like her own coffin.
Nair is an astounding director, who asks us to play along in a way that I'm not sure is viable or consistantly bold enough to make us want to step up. But what a force to be reckoned with. She's been given a lot of criticsm for finding a way to put her hertiage into this film, but I think it works and s useful in the scope it provides for the scale of British ambitions of the time.
My audience was irritating, but interesting -- people talked through the film a lot -- mostly women, who were angry and uncomfortable. Men, many more of whom were in attendence than I would have suspected, laughed in some inappropriate places, but mostly seemed taken aback to find themselves nodding along with the film's worldview.
Excellent score, but the music I love from the trailer isn't in the film! So now I have to figure out what the music in the trailer is.
The costumes are amazing, and it occured to me in noticing the details of the men's costumes (an aside, I've scored the coat from my parents, so if it's as I remember, I'm in business... my father is only quasi-amused) that so much of modern clothing annoys me because it seems to be a pale imitation done in memory of something grander. How boring. At least celebrate something grander would you? But I love all those high collars and scarves wrapped around men's throats. I could wax poetic on the thought of unwinding such a thing at a length that would embarass me more than I could possibly describe. Anyway....
I need to see it again. Interesting interesting thing.
Lots of great previews including the Huckabees thing (dude, Jude Law is in 6! movies coming out between now and the end of the year), The Life Aquatic, and Stage Beauty. It's going to be a busy fall at the theater for me.
Ultimate verdict on Vanity Fair: This movie is 100% why I am doing what I am doing right now, in the simplest of ways. It's pure beauty, and there is nothing in my nature that knows how to not wish to be a part of such a thing.
Finally, the film is ultimately about the differences between internal and external ambition which I thought was particularly interesting in this city of would-be conquerers who mostly cannot be bothered to leave petty adolesence behind.
That said, it is an astounding, gorgeous, and very flawed piece of cinema, that you expect to assault you but instead just sort of creeps away at you. I found I liked it well enough during, and only felt overwhelmed when it was over -- not for the ending or anything else really, but the sum total of what we endure with the characters is remarkable.
Reese Witherspoon is good in the role, but as has oft been mentioned she feels too modern. It's hard to entirely put a finger on why, although it's something akin to why Keira Knightly is at times one of the more absurd distractions in King Arthur -- a very posh, modern voice. Also this Becky has been gentled enough that when she's bad you actually stop to be dissappointed in her, which is a bit odd.
Jonathan Rhys Myers is, as ever, an unpleasant predatory self-absorbed cat-like thing. It's so predictable a bit of casting for him though, it's almost annoying, until he has one moment of such callousness that the wind gets knocked out of you.
The actor who walks away with the film though is James Purefoy. Where the rest of the cast seems to be striving gamely to keep up with the costumes and the scenery and to act through the stiffled manner of the time-period, he's just so physically alive on screen -- and I've seen him in other period pieces, and that was never there before. Really... not work that looks difficult, but the result is so astounding, it clearly is. Wonderful wonderful wonderful. (also, the one love scene is so honest and joyful it took me aback. Lovely stuff). Side note... he's a good rider, but every time he was on the damn horse I was like "get your toes in!" -- see what this shit is doing to me?
Gabriel Byrne is also an amazing menacing presence in this film and is one of the many constant specters of death over the thing. There's a visual device involving Becky's travelling trunk that makes it clear from our first view of it, that she's dragging about like her own coffin.
Nair is an astounding director, who asks us to play along in a way that I'm not sure is viable or consistantly bold enough to make us want to step up. But what a force to be reckoned with. She's been given a lot of criticsm for finding a way to put her hertiage into this film, but I think it works and s useful in the scope it provides for the scale of British ambitions of the time.
My audience was irritating, but interesting -- people talked through the film a lot -- mostly women, who were angry and uncomfortable. Men, many more of whom were in attendence than I would have suspected, laughed in some inappropriate places, but mostly seemed taken aback to find themselves nodding along with the film's worldview.
Excellent score, but the music I love from the trailer isn't in the film! So now I have to figure out what the music in the trailer is.
The costumes are amazing, and it occured to me in noticing the details of the men's costumes (an aside, I've scored the coat from my parents, so if it's as I remember, I'm in business... my father is only quasi-amused) that so much of modern clothing annoys me because it seems to be a pale imitation done in memory of something grander. How boring. At least celebrate something grander would you? But I love all those high collars and scarves wrapped around men's throats. I could wax poetic on the thought of unwinding such a thing at a length that would embarass me more than I could possibly describe. Anyway....
I need to see it again. Interesting interesting thing.
Lots of great previews including the Huckabees thing (dude, Jude Law is in 6! movies coming out between now and the end of the year), The Life Aquatic, and Stage Beauty. It's going to be a busy fall at the theater for me.
Ultimate verdict on Vanity Fair: This movie is 100% why I am doing what I am doing right now, in the simplest of ways. It's pure beauty, and there is nothing in my nature that knows how to not wish to be a part of such a thing.
Finally, the film is ultimately about the differences between internal and external ambition which I thought was particularly interesting in this city of would-be conquerers who mostly cannot be bothered to leave petty adolesence behind.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-09-04 12:55 am (UTC)do something on BESLAN
no subject
Date: 2004-09-04 06:03 am (UTC)Email your poetic waxings to me, please?
I'm now distracted by thoughts of unwinding scarves, having ones shoes slowly and mindfully unbuckled and unlaced, lacy cuffs flung back to be undone...
no subject
Date: 2004-09-04 06:17 am (UTC)BAH.
I can no longer formulate coherent thought.
no subject
Date: 2004-09-04 06:40 am (UTC)BTW, when are you going to be well enough for adventures. It feels so odd, not having met you yet, although the reasons are quite obvious enough.
no subject
Date: 2004-09-04 06:55 am (UTC)If you'd like both of us, it would need to be a Saturday or Sunday, or after six on a weekday. I could meet her at her job and we could meet you somewhere after work, perhaps. She works in the east village.
If you have plans to see Vanity Fair again, I would like to see it and she is ambivalent about it. That may be an option.
no subject
Date: 2004-09-04 07:05 am (UTC)And I walk exceptionally slowly myself, mainly because I saunter, so that's all fine. My sundays are my own currently, and this week is a bit screwy in the evenings, but for weekdays the following week would work.
no subject
Date: 2004-09-04 06:40 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-09-04 06:56 am (UTC)Or write fic.
Please write fic.
no subject
Date: 2004-09-04 07:03 am (UTC)Am trying to resist the whole Age of Sail crossover situation, mainly.
I think crossovers are the devil's work, and not in a good way.
no subject
Date: 2004-09-04 12:45 pm (UTC)But... I've also had a bunny for something quite short using the above image, that I will endeavor to write, although it has to go behind something else on a list of crap I am trying to get through (also, my hands are in pain from too much typing and I am, believe it or not, trying to conserve on keystrokes).
no subject
Date: 2004-09-04 11:00 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-09-04 11:16 am (UTC)I hadn't realized until I looked him up on IMDB last night how much silly, utter crap he's been in. Sort of made me even more pleased.
You may want to consider seeing the film in the theater because it's really gorgeous, and may not translate well to a smaller screen.
no subject
Date: 2004-09-04 11:26 am (UTC)Good for James is all I can say; nice that he went after it and then proved himself worthy of the bother. It's about time he got out of the terrible silly stuff. I think he's awfully handsome in a manly (but not grunty) way.
no subject
Date: 2004-09-04 11:43 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-09-04 11:57 am (UTC)And speaking of Jonathan, he absolutely blew me away in I'll Sleep When I'm Dead. I'm still stunned by my reaction to that film as I typically strongly dislike organized crime movies, but this was was very different and I am still struck by the fact that the film working depended entirely on his ability to convey magnetism and immense charisma while having very little screen time. It received mixed reviews, but remains among my favorite films this year.
no subject
Date: 2004-09-04 12:38 pm (UTC)